I have 2 Tables :
T_Customer
T_Address
In T_Customer Table have T_Address Foreign Key.
on Web Page Created form Where Customer can add there Details like First Name, Last Name, Address etc.
When Customer Submit form then Adddress details should insert in T_Address table And T_Address ID goes To T_Customer Table is it possible to Create 2 insert operations on one button click?
Is Joins is possible in this?
A single INSERT statement can only affect one table, albeit that you might have some triggers that in turn affect other tables. However, your question was specifically about an action on one button click. This is very possible, and indeed highly advisable. Simply create yourself a single stored procedure and pass it as parameters all the fields required for both Customer and Address tables.
Then within your Stored procedure you can have two inserts, one to Customers and one to Address. If you have a referential integrity constraint, then you must insert customers before address.
The advantage of this approach, is that all commands within a stored procedure are covered by the same transaction: it all succeeds or all fails, and requires only one round trip to the database, in turn being quicker and using less resources.
Related
I am implementing a form on table that allows the end-user to create a new project. This form contains a shuttle that allows the user to select the disposal site(s)(1+) that the project pertains to. I would like to use the output of the shuttle values to populate an association table between projects and disposal sites which is a many to many relationship.
This is my approach so far:
Created an additional VARCHAR2(4000)in the projects table to store the shuttle output (called 'Shuttle'). The shuttle output in this column looks something like 'CA-AT-D109Z2:CA-AT-D115:CA-AT-D174Z2'.
Created a process to take separate based on ':' and then add the values to the association table using the PL/SQL code:
Declare
Cursor c_values
is
Select
t.column_value As disposal_sites
From
Table ( apex_string.split(:P28_SHUTTLE, ':') ) t
Where
t.column_value Is Not Null;
Begin
for c in c_values loop
insert into MP_MDB_PROJECT_2_DSITE (PROJECTIDFK,DISPOSALSITEIDFK)
values (:P28_PROJECTNUMBER,c.disposal_sites);
end loop;
End;
The process/code enters the values from the shuttle into the association table in a loop as expected for the the disposal site but remains blank for projectidfk (the key that is '1' in the 1:m relationship). The code doesn't throw an error so I am having trouble debugging.
I think perhaps the problem I am having is that project number is computed after submission based on the users selections.Therefore, when the process run it finds :P28_PROJECTNUMBER to be null. Is there a way to ensure the computation to determine :P28_PROJECTNUMBER takes places first and is then followed by the PL/SQL process?
All help appreciated
If the form you're implementing is a native apex form, then you can use the attribute "Return Primary Key(s) after Insert" in the "Automatic Row Processing - DML" process to ensure that the primary key page item contains inserted value for any processes execute after this process.
Just make sure the process that handles the shuttle data is executed after the DML process.
I am using a global application user account to access database A. This user account does not have permissions to modify database A's schema (ie, create tables, modify tables, etc). This user also has access to database B, but only views. I need to run SQL to feed data from a view in database B into a table in database A.
In a perfect world, I would be able to use this SQL:
create database_a.mytable as (select * from database_b) with no data
However, the user can't create tables in database A. If I could get the DDL of the select statement then I could log in under my personal account (which doesn't have any access to database B) and run the DDL in database A to create the table.
The only other option is to manually write the SQL, but I don't want to do that, especially since this view I am wanting to copy has many columns of varying data types and sizes.
Edit: I may be getting closer. I just experimented with this:
show (select * from database_b.myview)
However, it generated the DLL of every single table that is used in the view itself, as well as the definition for the view. This doesn't really help me since I just want the schema of the select statement itself. In other words, I need what would be generated if I were to use the create table as statement mentioned above.
Edit for Rob: Perhaps "DDL" was the wrong term to use. Using show view db.myview just shows the definition of the view, not the schema it represents. In my above example of create table as, I show how you can create a table that mimics the schema of a result set returned in a select. It generates a DDL on the back end for creating a table and then executes that DDL to actually create the table. You can then say show table db.newtable and see the new table's DDL. I want to get that DDL directly from a select statement so that I can copy it, log out of the app account, into my personal account, and then execute the DDL to create the table.
This is only to save me the headache of having to type out the DDL manually by hand to save time and reduce typing errors, especially since the source view has so many columns. That said, I think hitting up the DBA or writing some snazzy stored procedure to do dynamic stuff would be a bit over the top for my needs. I think there has to be a way to get the DDL for creating a table schema directly from a select statement.
Generate DDL Statements for objects:
SHOW TABLE {DatabaseB}.{Table1};
SHOW VIEW {DatabaseB}.{View1};
Breakdown of columns in a view:
HELP VIEW {DatabaseB}.{View1};
However, without the ability to create the object in the target database DatabaseA your don't have much leverage. Obviously, if the object already existed INSERT INTO SELECT ... FROM DatabaseB.Table1 or MERGE INTO would be options that you already explored.
Alternative Solution
Would it be possible to have a stored procedure created that dynamically created the table based on the view name that is provided? The global application account would simply need privilege to execute the procedure. Generally the user creating the stored procedure would need the permissions to perform the actions contained within the stored procedure. (You have some additional flexibility with this in Teradata 13.10.)
There are some caveats with this approach. You are attempting to materialize views that could reference anywhere from hundreds to billions of records. These aren't simple 1:1 views that are put on top of the target tables. Trying to determine the required space in the target database to materialize the view will be difficult. Performance can and will vary depending on the complexity of the view and the data volumes. This will not be a fast-path or data block optimized operation.
As a DBA, I would be concerned with this approach being taken on by a global application account without fully understanding the intent. I trust you have an open line of communication with the DBA(s) involved for supporting this system. I'm sure there are reasons for your madness that can't be disclosed here.
Possible Solution - VOLATILE TABLE
Unless the implicit privilege for CREATE TABLE has been revoked from the global application account this solution should work.
Volatile tables do not require perm space. There table definitions persist for the duration of the session and any data inserted into them relies on the spool space of the user who instantiated it.
CREATE VOLATILE TABLE {Global Application UserID}.{TableA_Copy} AS
(
SELECT *
FROM {DatabaseB}.{TableA}
)
WITH NO DATA
NO PRIMARY INDEX
ON COMMIT PRESERVE ROWS;
SHOW TABLE {Global Application UserID}.{TableA_Copy};
I opted to use a Teradata 13.10 feature called NO PRIMARY INDEX. By default, CREATE TABLE AS will take the first column of the SELECT statement and make it the PRIMARY INDEX of the table. This could lead to skewing and perm space issues in your testing depending on the data demographics. You can specify an explicit PRIMARY INDEX on your own as you understand the underlying data. (See the DDL manuals for details on the syntax if you're uncertain.)
The use of ON COMMIT PRESERVE ROWS for the intent of this example is probably extraneous. But in reality if you popped any data into that table for testing this clause would be beneficial in Teradata mode as the data would otherwise be lost immediately after the CREATE TABLE or any other data manipulation was performed against the volatile table.
i have two tables
asset employee
assetid-pk empid-pk
empid-fk
now, i have a form to populate the asset table but it cant because of the foreign key constraint..
what to do?
thx
Tk
Foreign keys are created for a good reason - to prevent orphan rows at a minimum. Create the corresponding parent and then use the appropriate value as the foreign key value on the child table.
You should think about this update as a series of SQL statements, not just one statement. You'll process the statements in order of dependency, see example.
Asset
PK AssetID
AssetName
FK EmployeeID
etc...
Employee
PK EmployeeID
EmployeeName
etc...
If you want to "add" a new asset, you'll first need to know which employee it will be assigned to. If it will be assigned to a new employee, you'll need to add them first.
Here is an example of adding a asset named 'BOOK' for a new employee named 'Zach'.
DECLARE #EmployeeFK AS INT;
INSERT (EmployeeName) VALUES ('Zach') INTO EMPLOYEE;
SELECT #EmployeeFK = ##IDENTITY;
INSERT (AssetName, EmployeeID) VALUES ('BOOK',#EmployeeFK) INTO ASSET;
The important thing to notice above, is that we grab the new identity (aka: EmployeeID) assigned to 'Zach', so we can use it when we add the new asset.
If I understand you correctly, are you trying to build the data graph locally before persisting to the data? That is, create the parent and child records within the application and persist it all at once?
There are a couple approaches to this. One approach people take is to use GUIDs as the unique identifiers for the data. That way you don't need to get the next ID from the database, you can just create the graph locally and persist the whole thing. There's been a debate on this approach between software and database for a long time, because while it makes a lot of sense in many ways (hit the database less often, maintain relationships before persisting, uniquely identify data across systems) it turns out to be a significant resource hit on the database.
Another approach is to use an ORM that will handle the persistence mapping for you. Something like NHibernate, for example. You would create your parent object and the child objects would just be properties on that. They wouldn't have any concept of foreign keys and IDs and such, they'd just be objects in code related by being set as properties on each other (such as a "blog post" object with a generic collection of "comment" objects, etc.). This graph would be handed off to the ORM which would use its knowledge of the mapping between the objects and the persistence to send it off to the database in the correct order, perhaps giving back the same object but with ID numbers populated.
Or is this not what you're asking? It's a little unclear, to be honest.
The short version:
I have a grid view bound to a data source which has a SelectCommand with a left join in it because the FK can be null. On Update I want to create a record in the FK table if the FK is null and then update the parent table with the new records ID. Is this possible to do with just SqlDataSources?
The detailed version:
I have two tables: Company and Address. The column Company.AddressId can be null. On my ascx page I am using a SqlDataSource to select a left join of company and address and a GridView to display the results. By having my UpdateCommand and DeleteCommand of the SqlDataSource execute two statements separated by a semi-colon I am able to use the GridView's Edit and Delete functionality to update both table simultaneously.
The problem I have is when the Company.AddressId is null. What I need to have happen is have the data source create a record in the Address table and then update the Company table with the new Address.ID then proceed with the update as usual. I would like to do this with just data sources if possible for consistency/simplicity sake. Is it possible to have my data source do this, or perhaps add a second data source to the page to handle some of this?
Once I have that working I can probably figure out how to make it work with the InsertCommand as well but if you are on a roll and have an answer for how to make that fly as well feel free to provide it.
Thanks.
execute two statements separated by a
semi-colon
I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be possible to do both an INSERT and UPDATE in two statements with SqlDataSource just like you are doing here.
However, just so you know, if you have a lot of traffic or users using the application at the same time, you can run into concurrently issues where one user does something that affects another user and unexpected results can cascade and mess up your data. In general, for things like what you are doing - INSERT and UPDATE involving primary or foreign keys, usually SQL TRANSACTIONs are used. But, you must execute them as SQL stored procedures (or functions), on your SQL database. You are still able to call them from your SqlDataSource however by simply telling it that you are calling a stored procedure.
I will explain problem with an example:
There is two table in my database, named entry, tags
There is a column named ID_ENTRY in both table. When I add a record to table, entry, I have to take the ID_ENTRY of last added record and add it to table, tags. How can I do it?
The only way to do this is with multiple statements. Using dynamic sql you can do this by separating each statement in your query string with a semi-colon:
"DECLARE #ID int;INSERT INTO [Entry] (...) VALUES ...; SELECT #ID = scope_identity();INSERT INTO [TAGS] (ID_ENTRY) VALUES (#ID);"
Make sure you put this in a transaction to protect against concurrency problems and keep it all atomic. You could also break that up into two separate queries to return the new ID value in the middle if you want; just make sure both queries are in the same transaction.
Also: you are using parameterized queries with your dynamic sql, right? If you're not, I'll personally come over there and smack you 10,000 times with a wet noodle until you repent of your insecure ways.
Immediatly after executing the insert statement on first table, you should query ##IDENTITY doing "SELECT ##identity". That will retrieve the last autogenerated ID... and then just insert it on the second table.
If you are using triggers or something that inserts rows... this may be not work. Use Scope_Identity() instead of ##IDENTITY
I would probably do this with an INSERT trigger on the named entry table, if you have all of the data you need to push to the tags table available. If not, then you might want to consider using a stored procedure that creates both inside a transaction.
If you want to do it in code, you'll need to be more specific about how you are managing your data. Are you using DataAdapter, DataTables, LINQ, NHibernate, ...? Essentially, you need to wrap both inserts inside a transaction of some sort so that either inserts get executed or neither do, but the means to doing that depend on what technology you are using to interact with the database.
If you use dynamic sql, why not use Linq to Entity Framework, now EF is the recommend data access technology from Microsoft (see this post Clarifying the message on L2S Futures from ADO.NET team blog), and if you do an insert with EF the last identity id will available for you automatically, I use it all the time it's easy.
Hope this helps!
Ray.